^ I don't disagree. I guess this is really a part of the generational gap.

No. It's nothing to do with the generation gap.

Well, regardless, this song is just not for me in any way whatsoever, though I do recognize its merit.

I couldn't give a flying fart whether the song is for you or not, that wasn't what you were talking about, you said:

Dayvenkirq wrote:

I've never understood the buzz about "Tomorrow Never Knows", nor ever will ... even after watching the PH video Dean posted.

So no, it is not "regardless", it is not "irrespective of, without regard to, without reference to, disregarding, unmindful of, heedless of, careless of/about, indifferent to, unconcerned about, without consideration of, negligent of, setting aside, discounting, ignoring, notwithstanding, no matter, despite, in spite of, for all; informalirregardless of...", it was not only germane to the comment you made, it addressed it directly.

"You know what uranium is, right?It’s this thing called nuclear weapons. And other things. Like lots of things are done with uranium. Including some bad things.But nobody talks about that."

I guess "Well, regardless, this song is just not for me in any way whatsoever, though I do recognize its merit" is something I should have said in the beginning so that this conversation wouldn't take this hot course.

"Books were only one type of receptacle where we stored a lot of things we were afraid we might forget. There is nothing magical in them at all. The magic is only in what books say, ... ."

Really? So you thought you could make a comment and there be no come-backs?

Dayvenkirq wrote:

I guess "Well, regardless, this song is just not for me in any way whatsoever, though I do recognize its merit" is something I should have said in the beginning so that this conversation wouldn't take this hot course.

This conversation is not taking a hot course. I am replying to your comments in a calm controlled manner. I found the phrase "Well, regardless" to be flippant and unnecessarily dismissive.

Either you now understand the "buzz" about TNK or you do not. Whether you like the song or not is immaterial.

"You know what uranium is, right?It’s this thing called nuclear weapons. And other things. Like lots of things are done with uranium. Including some bad things.But nobody talks about that."

I was born the same year the song was recorded so I don't whether I was 'around for the song' or not (it certainly wasn't a song played on the airwaves much). I would say it was when I became a musician that I began to appreciate it.

Really? So you thought you could make a comment and there be no come-backs?

Dayvenkirq wrote:

I guess "Well, regardless, this song is just not for me in any way whatsoever, though I do recognize its merit" is something I should have said in the beginning so that this conversation wouldn't take this hot course.

This conversation is not taking a hot course. I am replying to your comments in a calm controlled manner. I found the phrase "Well, regardless" to be flippant and unnecessarily dismissive.

Either you now understand the "buzz" about TNK or you do not. Whether you like the song or not is immaterial.

OK, help me out here: what kind of a comeback is "I don't give a flying fart" ? How is that a sign of calm or controlled behavior? And I've no idea what's so flippant or unnecessarily dismissive about "regardless", when I've only used it to wrap things up fast and drive a point home.

Maybe I should rephrase it: I don't dig the song (which is just my taste), but thanks to Tim I got a little idea of what it's all about. Better?

Edited by Dayvenkirq - December 08 2013 at 20:38

"Books were only one type of receptacle where we stored a lot of things we were afraid we might forget. There is nothing magical in them at all. The magic is only in what books say, ... ."

I think this may have something to do with the styles on offer on both of these albums. While Vaudevillean pop is highly regarded in many Indie and underground groups alike, the one you encounter on Pepper sounds rather dated today imho. You certainly don't hear anything with that same vibe on the radio. Revolver on the other hand is one of the keystones that the whole current rock revival fad relies on. Seems simple really. Most people are into the rock part of The Beatles nowadays.

“The Guide says there is an art to flying or rather a knack. The knack lies in learning how to throw yourself at the ground and miss.”

^ Good observation, though they were always a rock band and never veered from that. In fact they started more or less as a rockabilly band; they wanted to sound American. Of course eventually everyone wanted to sound like the Beatles, so you started getting this hodge-podge of American-based British inspired rock 'n roll, and that unholy blend is still happening today-- bands such as Vampire Weekend emulating the Kinks, and so on and so forth. It is an endless and fascinating musical relationship that keeps reinventing itself.

I think The Crimson King's post comes closest to hitting the nail on the head. I qualify this statement with "closest" because musical taste is ultimately subjective, and there is no definitive answer. For my money Sgt. Pepper stresses the psychedelic a little TOO much, and may not appeal to current listeners. Although it seems disingenuous to question Lennon and McCartney's songwriting, I believe Revolver is better written and demonstrates more variety than Sgt Pepper's.

^^ 'Act Naturally' they did more as a spoof (which they did a lot of, the White Album, et al.). It was an older tune written by someone else, as I recall. When I talk of "rockabilly" I mean their early days as the Beatles/Silver Beatles. If you'd gone to see them play you might've wondered why these English kids think they're from Memphis.

You cannot post new topics in this forumYou cannot reply to topics in this forumYou cannot delete your posts in this forumYou cannot edit your posts in this forumYou cannot create polls in this forumYou cannot vote in polls in this forum